Procedia Computer Science

Procedia Computer Science 101, 2016, Pages 262 – 271

YSC 2016. 5th International Young Scientist Conference on Computational Science

Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged

Reinforced Concrete Columns
Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf*, M. Lezgy-Nazargah, and Hossein Bakhshi
Department of Civil Engineering, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran

Abstract
By neglecting optimization criteria, engineers can articulate different views with respect to retrofitting
a column for a particular bending moment and axial load for columns deteriorated by corrosion,
especially those in a salt factory where they are exposed to chloride ions. In this study, ETABS and
MATLAB softwares were applied to develop an optimal plan that involves minimal repair costs and
maximum safety. To determine the specifics of this optimal plan, it needs to consider all variable
parameters, including externally bonded steel plates, different types of concrete jacketing, and various
concrete compressive strengths. By stabilizing implemented loadings and building’s dimensions, 30
retrofitting designs are identified for consideration with respect to the two retrofitting methods to
identify their effects on structural component design, sustainability, and economics.
A comparison of two retrofitting methods reveals that the use of each retrofitting method would be
effective under certain circumstances. However, in this study, externally bonded steel plates appear to
be more effective for the type of construction problems identified. In addition, the results indicate that
the consideration of safety factors in the corroded structure to obtain optimal retrofitting can exert
dramatic effects on the parameters involved in the process. Therefore, all variables are carefully
analyzed in this study.

Keywords: Corroded column, retrofitting, concrete structures, externally bonded steel plates, concrete jacketing.

1 Introduction
Reinforced concrete (RC) rehabilitation is considered to be one of important aspects of the RC
construction. In fact, repaired and strengthened designs of RC column are usually based on the
assessment of engineers whose expertise can have an important role in the decision-making process.
Along with structural design failures of concrete columns, the corrosion of the reinforcements is the
most important cause of concrete deterioration. Consequently, they affect the serviceability, load
carrying capacity, and safety of the reinforced concrete structures (Montemor, Simoes, & Ferreira,

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +985144012789; fax: +985144012773.
E-mail address: Hamidiisc@yahoo.com

262 Peer-review under responsibility of organizing committee of the scientific committee of the
5th International Young Scientist Conference on Computational Science
© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
doi:10.1016/j.procs.2016.11.031
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

2003; Pantazopoulou & Papoulia, 2001; Rodriguez, Ortega, & Garcia, 1994; Vu & Stewart, 2000).
During the past decades, various practical and analytical models have been proposed to predict the
cost and service life of the composite concrete structures and estimate the remaining life of concrete
bridge, their physical mechanism and mathematical model in order to predict the concrete cover
cracking (Banerjee & Shinozuka, 2008; Cusson, Lounis, & Daigle, 2010; Eskandari & Korouzhdeh,
2016). These researches can help to identify the corrosion percentage and capacity reduction of RC
columns. However, all available retrofitting and repairing methods of concrete structures should be
identified for a structure with low loading capacity in order to select the most suitable approach. But
for rehabilitation and retrofitting of this reduced capacity, it has to be to known, the various retrofitting
and repairing methods for concrete structures (Bazaez & Dusicka, 2016; BouSiaS, 2009; Hollaway,
2011; Kalogeropoulos, Tsonos, Konstandinidis, & Tsetines, 2016; Ronagh & Eslami, 2013;
Zeinoddini & Dabiri, 2013). Since retrofitting methods aim to obtain the original mechanical
properties of the structure, it is highly recommended to study the force-moment interaction diagram of
structures in details. Usually columns are subjected to a combination of axial compression, P, and
bending moments, Mx and My, induced by unbalanced moments at connecting beams, vertical
misalignments, or lateral forces resulting from dynamic loads. From the practical point of view, the
RC column is performed by means of P–M interaction diagrams. This interaction diagram has been
applied to many structures such as fire-exposed reinforced concrete sections (El-Fitiany & Youssef,
2014; Law & Gillie, 2010), heated concrete sections (Caldas, Sousa, & Fakury, 2010), mortars for
different cement types (Nunes, Oliveira, Coutinho, & Figueiras, 2009), FRP-confined reinforced
concrete columns (Rocca, Galati, & Nanni, 2009), and RC interaction diagram codes (Korn, 1974).
Carpinteri et al. (Carpinteri, Corrado, Goso, & Paggi, 2012) studied the size-scale effects on reinforced
concrete columns by means of the numerical approach to compute the P–M interaction diagrams
which is well established in the design of reinforced concrete columns. This model can predict the size
and the confinement effects, according to the experimental results. According to another research,
different practical aspects such as (Júlio, Branco, & Silva, 2003) anchoring and slab crossing of the
added longitudinal reinforcement and spacing of stirrups and addition of new technology concrete
should be taken into account when reinforced concrete jacketing of columns were used to assess the
strengthening and rehabilitation. As mentioned before, there are several aspects of applying various
materials to retrofit the corroded RC structures. However, there is little available information about the
process/result and insufficient code guidelines for optimization of the designs and methods to retrofit
corrosion damages of reinforced concrete columns.

2 Significance of the Research

The aim of this research is to provide a method for the construction of a simplified interaction P-M
diagram for RC columns for retrofitting the practical design applications. Based on ETABS and
MATLAB coding, the proposed method aims to analyze the various but equivalent specimens in
conventional RC columns by considering appropriate axial force–bending moment interactions for RC
column with the minimum cost. However, for a particular axial force and bending moment, there is
only one economical design type, which means only for a certain percentage of reinforcement of the
designed concrete and retrofitting accessories, the column is optimized.
Main objectives of the present work are as follows:
x To optimize the reinforcement process considering the costs of concrete and reinforcement.
x To compare the column costs for various concrete strengths (Fc) as well as types of retrofitting
methods.

263
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

3 Case Study Frame Modeling and Gravity Load Effects

The case study structure consists of a five-floor salt factory in which modeling and analyzing are
conducted by ETABS building analysis (CSI, 2005). Fig. 1 shows the entire modeled structure.

B3

B4

Figure 1: ETABS model of five-floor salt factory.

The frame element is capable of replicating the effects of axial and biaxial shear deformations as
well as biaxial bending and torsion (CSI, 2005).The mentioned assumption is considered for analysis
in the early designs. The loads of 260, 200 kg/m2 have been applied as dead and live loads to the
floors respectively. The upper 80-ton salt tank storage is located right in the center of four columns
that means each column has 20 tons to bear. After five years, the capacity of each element reduces
about %50 due to corrosion. ETABS is used to analyze both corroded and initial frames. In addition,
two methods of retrofitting with various properties of materials are introduced to this damaged
structure and the P-M interaction diagrams are obtained for all the situations. Moreover, the output
data shows that the columns B3 and B4 in Fig. 1 are the critical columns. Owing to this fact, cost
optimization along with safe design based on the P-M interactions is applied to B3 as one of the
mentioned critical columns.

4 Retrofitting methods
4.1 Externally-Bonded the Steel Plates
One of the RC columns retrofitting procedure is done by external bonding of steel plates which can
improve the performance of concrete columns. The effectiveness of this method depends on the
hardness of the steel plates in lateral deformation of the RC column. To implement the retrofitting, the
steel plates are closed all over the column and small space will open to be filled up by concrete which
may increase the shear strength of column. Use a circular steel plate on investment is much more
difficult than other coating methods, but research shows that this method of increasing resistance and
displacement of inelastic column and is very effective (Karimi, Tait, & El-Dakhakhni, 2011).
Fig. 2 shows the schematic face of this method in since failure of this type will be on the patched areas
of the conventional longitudinal reinforcement in columns; it could be more effective to use long steel
plates to reduce the probability failure of the flexural longitudinal reinforcement.

264
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

(a) (b)

Figure 2: Retrofitted RC Column by (a) externally-bonded steel plate and (b) concrete jacketing considering L
Profile.

The formulae used here for define the section of column was introduced by ACI 318 (Committee,
Institute, & Standardization, 2008) for determining dimension and steel bars of concrete columns. The
ultimate axial load capacity of the concrete section must be checked to make sure concrete column can
support loads. Failure in the longitudinal reinforcement of patch such failure is ordinary in the column.
The use of steel coverage to reduce the probability of failure of longitudinal reinforcement patch
increases performance bending patch of column. If the patch is not enough column confining pressure
(fl) necessary to ensure non-failure of the patch column can be expressed using the following equation:

‫ܣ‬௕ ݂௬
݂௟ ൒ గ஽ᇲ (1)
ቂ ൅ ʹሺ݀௕ ൅ ܿሻቃ ݈௦
ଶ௡

Where Ab is longitudinal bar area is patched, fy the longitudinal rebar yield stress patched, D' the
diameter of longitudinal reinforcement wrapping, n the number of longitudinal bars. The parameter d b
is diameter longitudinal bars patched, c the cover of longitudinal bars and l s the length of the patch.
Confining pressure required coating thickness steel, t, is calculated as follows:
݂௟ ‫ܦ‬
‫ݐ‬൐ (2)
ͶͲͲ

Where D is the diameter column.

4.2 Reinforced Concrete Jacketing

Concrete cover includes layers of, longitudinal bars and stirrups. Cover the concrete column and L
profile increases bending strength and shear strength and increase ductility of the columns in this case
is quite evident. Reinforced concrete cover in cases where the severity of damage is a high column or
column does not have sufficient capacity to lateral forces is used. Fig. 2(b) shows the concrete
jacketing considering L profile method for the column.

Concrete is also used to fill up the space between the reinforcements using the following equations:
ܰ௥ǡ௠௔௫ ൌ ͳǤͶ ൅ ͳǤ͹ (3)

Where Nr,max maximum design load, DL and LL are dead load of column and the live load.
Where the cross sectional area of reinforcement bars, Ast calculated as following:

265
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

ܰ௥ǡ௠௔௫ ൌ ͲǤͺሾͲǤͺͷ߶௖ ݂௖ ൫‫ܣ‬௚ െ ‫ܣ‬௦௧ ൯ ൅ ߶௦ ݂௬ ‫ܣ‬௦௧ ሿ (4)

Where fc and Ag are the compressive strength of concrete and concrete sectional area.
Where the cross sectional area of L profile, As is given by
‫ܯ‬௨
‫ܣ‬௦ ൌ (5)
߶௦ ݂௬ ݀

Where Mu is the ultimate design moment and d is the distance from extreme compression fiber to
centroid of tension reinforcement. Finally, the process ends with the concrete jacketing considering L
profile of structure. Section sizes of columns before and after corrosion are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Column size before and after correction
bonded steel plate concrete jacketing
Before reform ͶͲ ൈ ͶͲ…ଶ ͶͲ ൈ ͶͲ…ଶ
After correction  ൌ ͸Ͳ… ͸Ͳ ൈ ͸Ͳ…ଶ
D = Diameter

The strengthened column is modeled and all values are controlled by CSA regulations. Then, the
verified model is simulated for various concrete strengths and also different thicknesses of steel plates
and steel L profiles. All the verifications for these developed models are implemented by assigning the
minimum quantities of Ø16 for reaching the closest results. According to the output values, the P-M
interaction diagrams are obtained for the whole models as well as for both normal and corroded
conditions of the column. Table 2 presents the numbers of Ø16 (n Ø16) for two retrofitting methods in
details.

5 Cost optimization
Regarding to the values obtained from P-M interaction diagrams, the maximum amounts of bending
moments and related values of axial loads deduced.
Table 2: Numbers of Ø16 for reinforcements of retrofitting methods.
Fc (MPa)
Retrofitting methods
25 30 35 40
0.5 16 14 12 10
Thickness of steel plates 1 14 13 12 11
(cm) 1.5 10 10 9 6
2 10 7 4 4
4 L10*10*0.8 24 22 14 8
4 L10*10*1 20 18 12 6
4 L10*10*1.2 18 16 12 6
4 L12*12*0.8 18 16 12 6
L profiles
4 L12*12*1 16 14 10 4
(cm)
4 L12*12*1.2 16 12 10 4
4 L14*14*0.8 10 10 10 4
4 L14*14*1 10 10 8 4
4 L14*14*1.2 8 8 8 4

266
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

However, as the cost of concrete and reinforcement may increase or decrease independently, the total
cost is optimized for a particular amount of axial load and bending moment and also a certain
percentage of reinforcement. The details are provided as follows:

C = Cc + Cr + Csl + Csp (6)

Where Cc = Cost of 1 m3 concrete for various compressive strengths and the common practice in
designing a column, is by considering the compressive strength of concrete as 25, 30, 35 and 40 MPa
with cost of 30, 35, 40 and 45$ per m3 respectively.
Cr = Cost of reinforcement and Csl = Cost of steel L profile by considering 1$/kg for both of them.
Csp= Cost of steel plate as 1$/kg.
Further, separate analyses are conducted for all combinations of Table 2 to select an optimized
retrofitted column which can help to acquire the optimum cost as well as the interaction diagrams.

6 Analysis and Results

6.1 P–M interaction diagram
Fig. 3 for the cases of 25, 30 and 35 MPa compressive strength (Fc) of concrete columns shows the
interaction diagrams for the results of externally-bonded steel plates respectively without considering
the strength reduction (Ø) and environmental factors (CE) in these interaction diagrams.
The legend of each plot indicates various thicknesses of steel plates in range of 0.5 to 2 cm
corresponding to the retrofitted column and also the initial and corroded situations of column.
Comparing the results before and after corrosion shows that the moment and compression axial
load sustains 15, 20% reductions respectively. Scrutinizing the behavior of the column confirms that
the plate’s increasing thickness boosts the axial load capacities about 20% but the bending moments
do not maintain considerable growth. On the other hand, the increase in plate thickness does guarantee
the rise of M values. Also, there are similar trends for Fc of 30 and 35 MPa.
It can be mentioned here that in each of three Figs, the interaction diagram for t=2 cm of retrofitting
steel plates has the most integral area under the curve (A) in the diagrams, so it can be concluded that,
from the safety point of view, the P and M values related to the thickness are the optimal designs for
all the diagrams. Finally, comparing each Fig, the amount of A for the diagram related to Fc equal to
25 MPa is the maximum value in all available situations, therefore its P, M, t and Fc amounts would
be the most optimal designs.
Fig. 4 shows the interaction diagrams for the concrete jacketing considering L profile method using
various numbers and thicknesses of steel L profiles for the Fc of 25 MPa. This method is similar to the
previous one and displays the same trends in all 3 Figs, thus the increase of the number of L profiles as
well as their thicknesses is reflected in the interaction results. Further evaluations confirm that the
results of each Fig for t=1.2 cm of L profiles are most satisfying. However, where t=0.8, 1 and 1.2 cm
of L profiles are 14, 12 and 10 respectively yielded similar results.
Overall, of all Figs, the results acquired from 12*14*14 are more satisfying than those of others
since it has most integral area under the curve. Thus, the optimum status can be acquired by
considering the cost of each parameter.

267
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

350
Retrofitted by t=2 cm Retrofitted by t=0.5 cm
300 Fc = 30 MPa
Retrofitted by t=1.5 cm Retrofitted by t=1 cm 250
200
Before Corrosion After Corrosion 150

P (KN)
400 100
Fc = 25 MPa 50
350 0
300 -50
250 -100
-150
200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
150 M (KN.m)
P (KN)

100 300
50 250 Fc = 35 MPa
200
0 150
-50 100

P (KN)
-100 50
-150 0
-50
-200 -100
-250 -150
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 -200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
M (KN.m) M (KN.m)
Figure 3: P-M interactions for externally bonding steel plates for different values of Fc.

In addition, surveying the whole process, the outputs of 14*14*1.2 L profiles offer the highest
value for A among all diagrams.
Comparing both retrofitting methods for Fc of 25 MPa in the same conditions indicates that
applying external steel plates shows about 40% increase in maximum loading capacity of the column
comparing to use concrete jacketing with steel L profiles which can play a significant role in choosing
retrofitting method especially when the costs are brought to attention too. Therefore, the optimization
of costs is conducted for the following section.
4 L12*12*1.2 4 L12*12*1
4 L14*14*1.2 4 L14*14*1 4 L12*12*0.8 Before Corrosion
After Corrosion
4 L14*14*0.8 Befor Corrosion 250
200
After Corrosion
150
250 100
P (KN)

50
200 0
-50
-100
150 -150
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
M (KN.m)
P (KN)

100
4 L10*10*1.2 4 L10*10*1
4 L10*10*0.8 Before Corrosion
50 After Corrosion
250
200
0 150
P (KN)

100
-50 50
0
-50
-100 -100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-150
M (KN.m) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
M (KN.m)
Figure 4: P-M interactions for concrete jacketing method for various numbers and thicknesses of steel L profiles
with Fc of 25 MPa.

268
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

6.2 Selecting Retrofitting method using optimization

It is better to use optimization method to study the P-M diagrams and identify their best conditions.
To do so, MATLAB was employed to optimize the loading capacity; safety issues, and, later, costs.
Fig. 5(a) shows the interaction diagrams for cost optimization of retrofitting the external steel
plates. According to the results, increasing of Fc decreases the rebar numbers. Also, the most effective
parameter in total cost is the steel plates due to their adjacency to each other. The intersection points
display the optimal cost of design parameters which can be achieved for various concrete Fcs as well
as plate thicknesses of. For example, for concrete Fc of 40 MPa, the intersection points are 7, 260 and
1.05 for rebar number Ø16, cost and plate thickness of respectively. Obviously, there is a %40 cost
reduction in Fc 25. Besides, these Matlab interaction diagrams can significantly help to specify the
optimal cost and design parameters.

(a) (b)

Figure 5: Comparing Rebar Ø16 and plate thickness in terms of the costs ($) per unit length for various (a) Fc
and (b) L profiles.

Fig. 5(b) shows that the increasing number of steel L profiles typically decreases the numbers of
rebar Ø 16 used for reinforcing. So, the change range in numbers of Ø16 for 100*100 L profile is
broader than that of the other two. The interaction points of the diagram may be expressed as the
optimal design circumstances for having the minimum amount of cost, proper numbers of Ø16 and
thickness due to being in allowable values of regulation. For example, considering L 140*140, the
optimal numbers of Ø16 for thickness and cost will be 10, 0.95 and 138 respectively. Furthermore, it
can be also claimed that these optimization methods would be applicable for other ranges of F c,
thicknesses of L profiles, concrete jacketing, and interaction of whole parameters, each can have an
important role in designing procedures. Optimization methods are mostly used to calculate optimal
costs and methods, similar to what has previously been done. Here, to acquire better optimization, it
seems necessary to consider the optimum cost along with the optimal amounts of P and M.
Fig. 6(a) depicts the interaction of P and M numbers of Ø16, steel plate thicknesses, and total cost
of retrofitting. The results show that the number of Ø16 reduces for the constant M and while P rises,
the plate thickness as well as total cost increase, too. It can be used, on the other hand, to specify the
cost, thickness, and number of Ø16 for particular values of P-M interactions. Fig. 6(b) shows the
relationship between the design parameters incorporating L profiles number of Ø16 for the reinforced
concrete jacking (RCJ). This contour can be used to optimize any engineering design with different
values of design parameters particularly P and M. So that for each specified parameters, the optimal
cost can be identified also.

269
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

(a)

(b)

Figure 6: Range of design parameters retrofitting with (a) steel plates and (b) L profile numbers of Ø16.

7 Conclusion
Selecting an appropriate retrofitting method for concrete structures is significantly important
especially from cost optimization point of view. Thus, the analysis, design, and implementation of the
optimization method should provide maximum P and M along with safety since it leads to better
performance under various Ps and Ms. The analysis can also help engineers to identify the effects of
various materials on the P and M. In the case study of the salt factory, two types of retrofitting
methods were applied to a %20 critically-corroded column. The results are as follows:
1. Considering ‘merely’ safety factors, applying externally-bonded steel plate yields about %40
growths in comparison to concrete jacketing retrofitting which means implementing steel plates are
safer than using concrete jacketing retrofitting.
2. However, considering all parameters involved in design procedures for the constants P and M, the
concrete jacketing retrofitting shows approximately %70 decrease in total cost which makes it
more economical comparing to the other method.
3. Finally, these optimization methods are applicable to any types of retrofitting methods which
simultaneously include both safety and minimum costs.

References
Banerjee, S., & Shinozuka, M. (2008). Mechanistic quantification of RC bridge damage states under
earthquake through fragility analysis. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 23(1), 12-22.
Bazaez, R., & Dusicka, P. (2016). Cyclic behavior of reinforced concrete bridge bent retrofitted with
buckling restrained braces. Engineering Structures, 119, 34-48.
BouSiaS, S. (2009). Repair/retrofitting of concrete structures with fiber-reinforced polymers. Failure,

270
Optimal Methods for Retrofitting Corrosion-Damaged Reinforced Concrete Columns Hamid Eskandari-Naddaf et al.

Distress and Repair of Concrete Structures, 244.

Caldas, R. B., Sousa, J. B. M., & Fakury, R. H. (2010). Interaction diagrams for reinforced concrete
sections subjected to fire. Engineering Structures, 32(9), 2832-2838.
Carpinteri, A., Corrado, M., Goso, G., & Paggi, M. (2012). Size-scale effects on interaction diagrams
for reinforced concrete columns. Construction and Building Materials, 27(1), 271-279.
Committee, A., Institute, A. C., & Standardization, I. O. f. (2008). Building code requirements for
structural concrete (ACI 318-08) and commentary.
Cusson, D., Lounis, Z., & Daigle, L. (2010). Benefits of internal curing on service life and life-cycle
cost of high-performance concrete bridge decks–A case study. Cement and Concrete
Composites, 32(5), 339-350.
El-Fitiany, S., & Youssef, M. (2014). Interaction diagrams for fire-exposed reinforced concrete
sections. Engineering Structures, 70, 246-259.
Eskandari, H., & Korouzhdeh, T. (2016). Cost optimization and sensitivity analysis of composite
beams. Civil Engineering Journal, 2(2), 52-62.
Hollaway, L. (2011). Key issues in the use of fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) composites in the
rehabilitation and retrofitting of concrete structures Service life estimation and extension of
civil engineering structures (pp. 8): Woodhead Publishing Limited Cambridge.
Júlio, E., Branco, F., & Silva, V. (2003). Structural rehabilitation of columns with reinforced concrete
jacketing. Progress in Structural Engineering and Materials, 5(1), 29-37.
Kalogeropoulos, G. I., Tsonos, A.-D. G., Konstandinidis, D., & Tsetines, S. (2016). Pre-earthquake
and post-earthquake retrofitting of poorly detailed exterior RC beam-to-column joints.
Engineering Structures, 109, 1-15.
Karimi, K., Tait, M. J., & El-Dakhakhni, W. W. (2011). Testing and modeling of a novel FRP-encased
steel–concrete composite column. Composite Structures, 93(5), 1463-1473.
Korn, A. (1974). Reinforced concrete interaction diagrams. Computers & Structures, 4(2), 233-242.
Law, A., & Gillie, M. (2010). Interaction diagrams for ambient and heated concrete sections.
Engineering Structures, 32(6), 1641-1649.
Montemor, M., Simoes, A., & Ferreira, M. (2003). Chloride-induced corrosion on reinforcing steel:
from the fundamentals to the monitoring techniques. Cement and Concrete Composites,
25(4), 491-502.
Nunes, S., Oliveira, P. M., Coutinho, J. S., & Figueiras, J. (2009). Interaction diagrams to assess SCC
mortars for different cement types. Construction and Building Materials, 23(3), 1401-1412.
Pantazopoulou, S., & Papoulia, K. (2001). Modeling cover-cracking due to reinforcement corrosion in
RC structures. Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 127(4), 342-351.
Rocca, S., Galati, N., & Nanni, A. (2009). Interaction diagram methodology for design of FRP-
confined reinforced concrete columns. Construction and Building Materials, 23(4), 1508-
1520.
Rodriguez, J., Ortega, L., & Garcia, A. (1994). Assessment of structural elements with corroded
reinforcement. Paper presented at the CORROSION AND CORROSION PROTECTION OF
STEEL IN CONCRETE. PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE HELD
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD, 24-28 JULY 1994. VOLUME 1.
Ronagh, H., & Eslami, A. (2013). Flexural retrofitting of RC buildings using GFRP/CFRP–A
comparative study. Composites Part B: Engineering, 46, 188-196.
Vu, K. A. T., & Stewart, M. G. (2000). Structural reliability of concrete bridges including improved
chloride-induced corrosion models. Structural safety, 22(4), 313-333.
Zeinoddini, M., & Dabiri, A. (2013). Seismic Analytical Model for Retrofitted Old Reinforced
Concrete Structures. Procedia Engineering, 54, 188-206.

271